Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

. . . I do have one particular piece for which I like the theme, and every variation is "okay", but I have no modulation for it, and nowhere to go with it. (This is one area, I think, where I have as little talent/knowledge as there could possibly be. I can tell when something's working and when it's not just from my general musical background, but I have no idea how to fix something that isn't working.)

Derulux,

In addition to what Steve wrote, good composers have certain “tools” in their little bags of tricks. While flights of inspiration are typically the very best material with which to work, there are several, well-defined techniques that many composers use to “connect” those more inspired moments, and make the music flow between them.

Take a baby-simple example: Everyone has heard, or learned, Hot Cross Buns (Well, maybe not Nikolas, who first heard "Bring me a Mandolin", or something else by Hadjithakis!) –[1] Write a measure using three scale notes.[2] Repeat the first measure. (Recapitulation!)[3] Use a couple of those same notes in a different order, a different rhythm. (Augmentation!)[4] Re-repeat the first measure. (Recapitulation!). . . Compositional techniques! (Sonata-Allegro Form at its most rudimentary!)

So, to your dilemma on nowhere to go with it.:*Take the part you like, and after stating it, try writing it backwards.*Take the part you like, and after stating it, try writing all the intervals “up-side-down”.*Take the part you like, and after stating it naturally, then extend the values of some notes, and shorten the values of others. *Take the part you like, and after stating it naturally, then extend the intervals, by moving them up or down the natural harmonics of the original note.*Identify the part you like as either a musical question, or a musical statement. If it is a question, then follow it with a musical answer. If the first part is a statement, then ask a musical question about that statement. Then answer THAT question. This builds into a musical dialog - ideal, incidentally, for Theme and Variations!(God, I am giving everything away here!)

These somewhat mechanical tools do not replace inspired melody or harmonies - NOT AT ALL. Over-use creates music that is formulaic and mechanical! But they do augment pure inspiration, and frequently become the SOURCE for new inspiration.

Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

. . . I do have one particular piece for which I like the theme, and every variation is "okay", but I have no modulation for it, and nowhere to go with it. (This is one area, I think, where I have as little talent/knowledge as there could possibly be. I can tell when something's working and when it's not just from my general musical background, but I have no idea how to fix something that isn't working.)

Derulux,

In addition to what Steve wrote, good composers have certain “tools” in their little bags of tricks. While flights of inspiration are typically the very best material with which to work, there are several, well-defined techniques that many composers use to “connect” those more inspired moments, and make the music flow between them.

Take a baby-simple example: Everyone has heard, or learned, Hot Cross Buns (Well, maybe not Nikolas, who first heard "Bring me a Mandolin", or something else by Hadjithakis!) –[1] Write a measure using three scale notes.[2] Repeat the first measure. (Recapitulation!)[3] Use a couple of those same notes in a different order, a different rhythm. (Augmentation!)[4] Re-repeat the first measure. (Recapitulation!). . . Compositional techniques! (Sonata-Allegro Form at its most rudimentary!)

So, to your dilemma on nowhere to go with it.:*Take the part you like, and after stating it, try writing it backwards.*Take the part you like, and after stating it, try writing all the intervals “up-side-down”.*Take the part you like, and after stating it naturally, then extend the values of some notes, and shorten the values of others. *Take the part you like, and after stating it naturally, then extend the intervals, by moving them up or down the natural harmonics of the original note.*Identify the part you like as either a musical question, or a musical statement. If it is a question, then follow it with a musical answer. If the first part is a statement, then ask a musical question about that statement. Then answer THAT question. This builds into a musical dialog - ideal, incidentally, for Theme and Variations!(God, I am giving everything away here!)

These somewhat mechanical tools do not replace inspired melody or harmonies - NOT AT ALL. Over-use creates music that is formulaic and mechanical! But they do augment pure inspiration, and frequently become the SOURCE for new inspiration.

Ed

I thank you both for taking the time to reply in such detail and care. It is truly appreciated it. I'm going to keep hammering at it, and if I get it to a workable place, or even if I continue to be completely stuck, I'll share and perhaps get another masterclass.

Steve- Incidentally, I'm going after the Rhapsody. Great piece. Hopefully I can make heads of it, and not turn too many tails. I'll let you know when I've got it working well under my fingers.

_________________________
Every day we are afforded a new chance. The problem with life is not that you run out of chances. In the end, what you run out of are days.

Allazart: I think it's a very nice short loop. Easy to play and right to the point. Of course there are many things one would do to 'make it better', but who the heck cares really... And the theme is fun and fine! I do think that the piece deserves a live performance... I can't do it myself, but perhaps someone else could?

Derulux: Yes, keep working on it. I think that composing is ALSO a great deal of 'getting used to it' and being used to doing it. It's a bit like a habit. It comes easy to some people because they've composed so much (and often these people burn out eventually...). Don't give up and show your efforts to us (whenever anyhow. It doesn't have to be THIS month or any other month, or anywhere). I fully support the idea that composition is about communication and if you're not showing it to anyone... well... you're not communicating.

Ted: There are a few ways to do this (combine different PDF files), depending on what you've got on your computer and how tech savy you are...

1. If you're "printing to PDF" with a PDF printer (these small software that allow you to print directly to a PDF file rather than a normal physical paper?), then a few can 'append' or 'delete'. For example PrimoPDF asks you the name of the new file. If you put the name of an already existing file, it will ask you to either append it, or delete it. You just need to be careful on which files to print first.

2. If you've got Acrobat Pro you can combine directly with it, different types of files (including PDF files of course), and sort out the pages at any point. But this costs money. Other software that do this is NirtoPDF, which again is not free.

3. If you've got someone who knows what they're doing just send the files over and he can combine them for you. In fact I just did that, so there you go:

They both are fine works, and I especially liked A Romantic Duality because of many things (including the clever titling... hehe...).

And your handwriting is great! It's not a clean score or anything and there a few things I'd like to ask you, but it remains great as evidence of a musicians and composers handwriting!

Questions

Barclay's Blues:

Why this time signature? I understand that you're following what you wrote (which is especially clear in your second work), but in this case wouldn't it work to have the 'traditional' way of 'swing' in the tempo marking and leave it up to the performers to play it as intended? It's something that's met quite frequently in more 'jazz' scores.

And what do the numbers in circles with the arrow mean. I think that your playing matches the score without any going back and forth so I'm not too clear about that either.

A Romantic Duality.

There's no time signature in this one, right? I don't mind it at all, since it's what I've been doing to a few of my own works lately... But at the same time the piece didn't strike me as 'no tempo or no time signature' piece, it felt a bit straight forward rhythm wise?

Also, everyone, please note that the recording of 'A Romantic Duality' starts at page 5 of the work, not at the beginning. It's PART 2.

Just beware that the score was produced by me, so any errors (especially in the division between hands) is my fault (and I just saw that the rit in the last system is touching the slur line, but I don't have the time to fix it now.).

Thank you for taking the time to listen and comment, Nikolas. Every one of your points is correct, and they all stem from the fact that I am very much an improviser by nature. Ideas flow very easily at the instrument but I find the task of making even a reasonable approximation in notation a frightful struggle. That is why I am posting old pieces - because I haven't attempted it for a long time, but have just recorded hundreds, possibly thousands of improvisations since I retired.

Start at the beginning.Play until 1 with an arrow and jump to 1 without an arrow.Play until 2 with an arrow and jump to 2 without an arrow..And so on until the end.

Sorry, I should have explained that.

Yes, I have always found the notation of swing a dilemma. The way you suggest is the more accepted, and is unambiguous as long as the triplet feeling is constant. Once a mixture of rhythms occurs it can get difficult very quickly. I began using the notation I do after reading Brubeck's comments in the preface to Points On Jazz, wherein he suggests writing things as they sound. There is also the so called dotted note convention for triplet rhythm, which adds another confusion.

The great transcribers of stride, swing and similar styles, Dapogny, Farrell, Posnak etc, use your way, and you are quite right in that my piece is so simple that it might be better for communication all round.

All this, of course, stems from the fact that I have had no conventional tuition at all in these things, and none in conventional piano technique either for that matter. An experienced professional like you would spot this lack immediately. I assure you I am keenly aware of it also. However, at sixty-five, I am enjoying spontaneous creation so much that I see little point in trying to assimilate these skills now.

Nonetheless, I thought your thread well worth supporting, and thank you again for taking the time to listen. And thanks for combining the pages.

Edited by Ted (12/04/1203:29 AM)

_________________________
"It is inadvisable to decline a dinner invitation from a plump woman." - Fred Hollows

Steve- Incidentally, I'm going after the Rhapsody. Great piece. Hopefully I can make heads of it, and not turn too many tails. I'll let you know when I've got it working well under my fingers.

Thank you for some exciting news on a Tuesday morning. I'm excited to hear how you do with it. Don't get me wrong it's plenty difficult, but I think it sounds harder than it is. Have fun and good luck.

Are you "sandbagging" on us? You have no formal training? And you can not read music?

If that is truly the case, Braviss-iss-iss-issimo!Ed

I know that Rune will come in and reply, but the score is my end product, from his midi file. And he did confirm that he doesn't read music either because he couldn't check the score! Which is why I'm quite weary there may be errors in there, or foolishly done notational tricks... hem...

But if it's about music then heck YES! Here's to all who think improvisation is not composition, etc... It's a very fine work (albeit, as Steve said... you can't put to sleep a child in a couple of minutes, but still... hehe).

It might well be my defective ear, but in the recording of Rune's LULLABY, I hear a minor second dissonance at the beginning of Measures 5 and 13 - probably an E in the treble. I do not see any trace of that in the computer-generated score.

Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

Are you implying that Rune played this once, completely spontaneously, fully formed, while recording it; and that the score you have rendered through transcription is the result of extemporaneous improvisation?

(If true, this could be the exception that proves my rule!)Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

Oh no... Now I see that my post implied many things. What I meant that since rune isn't around we're all assuming great many things.

I think that he might have played it a few times and then record it. But no idea really. Rune will let us know, but the very fact that he doesn't read score, does mean that his compositions are more based in what he plays and thinks while playing, rather than pre planing, etc.

Again no idea and I hope that Rune will come to clarify things.

Regardless to say that I really like his lullaby! Very much so!

EDIT: Ed it may very well be that I missed a note or two. I did delete a couple of notes that seemed to be too silent and thus assumed they were 'wrong' somehow, but it can easily be corrected! Thanks for checking it out!

This was sent to me a few moments ago, by a new member (whose nickname here in PianoWorld I don't know), but his name in the email is Sean Montgomery. I'm hoping that he'll come over to post his thoughts and become a regular member, since he's new!

Here's to all who think improvisation is not composition, etc... It's a very fine work

As you know, I happen to be one of those who believes that composition is a very specific art and craft; and improvisation is quite an other, distinct, art and craft.

I would be willing to bet, and hope that Rune will chime in here with clarification, that this piece is played ESSENTIALLY the exact same way each time, in spite of not having it written down.

Rune?

Hi Ed,

Many thanks for your positive comments on my lullaby.

Nikolas kindly offered me to produce a computer generated score of the piece:

quote=Nikolas]Rune: Sure thing. Send it over. I'll check how it's made. If you used a clicked track (so if you pretty much followed the tempo) then it'll be dead easy to create the score. If you just recorded it the 'fast way' without any tempo, then things might be trickier, and I can't promise anything but I will give it a try. [/quote]

As I did not use a click track on the original recording, I suspected that the score could be difficult to process.For that reason I made a new recording as a midi file for Nikolas and followed a click track at 74 bps. Not very easy and I´m sure I played the piece different in areas.

Under normal circumstances I believe I play my compositions essentially the same way each time. Hope this clear things up. Sorry for the confusion.

And no, I am not able to read music from scores. I am self-taught, with the exception of a few very basic piano lessons at school when I was a kid

Thank you for the clarification. I hope I did not detract in any way from your wonderful work by lapsing into a philosophical discussion of composition versus improvisation.

I'll also apologize for taking it a bit further, but I have to say this...

An improvisation is something that's an one way, or similar. That's the point of it right? But if you record that (with midi, as it happened in Runes case), does it remain an impro, or becomes a composition?

For me in any way you create a new musical work, it's all composition = creativity unleashed! That's why I don't differentiate between the two, although I see the point in doing so... :-/Note: I just wish I had mod powers in order to gather all the works in the first post of the thread... I'll talk to the admins/mods responsible for this....

I lifted the following from a recent thread in which you and I were participating.

Originally Posted By: LoPresti

. . . in my mind there is a clear distinction between a Composition and an Improvisation.

The former is music that is somewhat “formalized”, in that it is finished, complete unto itself, and repeatable by someone other than the originator. Typically, a composition is committed to paper, and that is the primary way it is transferred from composer to performer.

An improvisation, as its name implies, is ad-hoc, extemporaneous, and would seldom, if ever, be repeated note-for-note. (An exception to this might be the transcription of a jazz solo, where the student is attempting to analyze for learning.) The improvisation carries the connotation of being in the moment, and not lasting beyond the “now”.

Obviously, there will be “grey” areas between what is clearly a “composition”, and what is obviously an improvisation. But I believe those in-between cases to be few, and their characteristics are certainly not changed by the simple act of recording. .

I know you understand my point of view on the subject(s), but for those who may not -I think of composition as a process; and I contrast that with improvisation, which is an event. In many instances, both are musical miracles, but they ARE different.

My reason for asking Rune about working on his Lullaby, and if he played it essentially the same each time, was this. A composition is something that is learned, essentially note-for-note, and then repeated. The art and skill of improvisING can be learned, but an improvisation is always “off-the-cuff”. The venerable jazz pianist Teddy Wilson could improvise, AND, more recently, he prepared tunes for performance that sounded like they were improvised, but were played essentially the same way each time. I believe the latter process is composition.

I also believe that Rune’s Lullaby is a composition. It fits all the criteria, and now that Nikolas has been good enough to capture it on paper, it can easily be transfered to other musicians for their performance.

I used to compose - quite a bit. I still improvise on jazz standards. I love them both, and they are two, completely different skills, and they produce two completely different forms of the art. (Well, I would not use "art" in my case, but you get the idea.)

Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

I fully agree with you. I should, just in case, note that I do not find either 'better' or 'worst'. I'm in love with many guitar solos (in pop/rock idioms) that I wouldn't consider them anything less that masterfully composed... compositions!

Still, now with the aid of technology we have something of a problem with our definitions (which are pretty much the same): You can capture note by note, rhythm by rhythm, dynamic by dynamic, phrase by phrase even the most complex of improvisations. Exactly like taking a photograph. And this photograph can remain in time and forever (as long as humanity exists and as long as there's interest in it).

It's the same with any improvisation: Even if the process is momentarily in real time, an event as you say (and as it should be!) the capturing of that event, makes it... something else. Something completely different!

Thanks for all the contributions, both the music and discussion. I have listened to each piece several times.

Pieces submitted in order of posting :

Nikolas: Very short and sweet , a sense of intrigue and mystery.... I hope we shall be hearing more of your compositions in the months to come.

Rune: Rune , this is a lovely piece with a gentle and gracious spirit. Thanks for submitting your composition. You asked about my recording.... yes, as Nikolas mentioned it was played on an acoustic grand at home, and using a Zoom H4N recorder. Thanks for your comments.

Steve: Wonderful rich textures, mood and chord development. I like the sense of depth and reaching forth. I don't find it particularly dark or sad. I look forward to hearing it played on acoustic piano. Thanks for your submission.

Dara: not to bad for your first submission someone mentioned wandering. yes i like to wander and also wonder.

Allazart: Thanks allazart for your contribution and piece. This is a lively piece and sounds like you had fun making it. Hope to hear more from you.

Ted: Very much enjoyed listening to your pieces, Barclay's Blues and A Romantic Duality. They both seem to suggest another time in the past, and have a sense to me of being cinematic.

If I may comment is that I think this is a very clever work, rather difficult to perform live, and the mechanical recording (from Finale?) certainly doesn't do it justice. But it's the first time I've heard something so dissonant from you Larry and I'm enjoying every minute of it.

Dara: Thanks for your words about my work. I have a few ideas for the coming months... So I won't run out! And thanks for offering your insights for all those works so far. It's been very smooth so far I think!

Would agree with your observation, LoPresti -- perhaps the thread title should be extended to "depository of compositions and arrangements from Piano World", because I consider both areas to be of interest to Piano World listeners. I personally consider arranging to be a heckuva lot easier than composition (although neither one is easy), and have many more of the former than the latter in my "portfolio".

I do know that Nikolas wished he had made a more encompassing title, to include Compositions and Improvisations, and now perhaps Arrangements. In my mind, these three species are different enough to warrent each their own thread.

On the other hand, I start thinking about the settings, or the performance of many of these different creations. It is very (VERY!) common for the typical jazz trio to be playing a "song" composed by Cole Porter (for instance), that is arranged by a member of the trio, and that is improvised upon, in turn, by all three players. Such performances (settings) are so common, it is difficult to think of them in terms of categories we are discussing here.

Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

Thank you for the clarification. I hope I did not detract in any way from your wonderful work by lapsing into a philosophical discussion of composition versus improvisation.

I'll also apologize for taking it a bit further, but I have to say this...

No reason for apologies. The topic you are discussing is interesting

Nikolas: Sorry for not responding to your contribution earlier. I have actually listened to several of your compositions both at your web site and on YouTube. I find your music very interesting and enjoyable.

I regularly slip into standard chord progressions in my attempts to compose, despite the struggle to extend my musical language. I think your Sketches for Solo Piano plays an important role and I am convinced they are appreciated by many composers

Rune: Thanks for listening my work(s). I do hope that I'm contributing something 'new' most of the times I compose...

To everyone, just a word of caution: I've requested to Frank that I get some editing powers (YAY) so I will be able to edit the initial post with all links and stuff, within the weekend! However I'm quite uncertain if I'll have enough time to handle more than 1 thread per month and I do think that the general idea of 'composing' is creativity, which is evident in every single work presented here... So, personally, I'm find with a single thread encompassing all that don't belong in their own thread.

BTW, I should note that wr in another forum of PW, did ask which works go in here and which should have their own thread and I'm not sure I have a clear answer, but I think that smaller works go here and larger works warrant their own thread... :-/ Comments?